2 Members on IR

[hollywood13]

Hey a quick question for a friend. One of my course mates is on IR with me, and his common law who is also in the military was just posted away from the home they are both paying a mortgage on. Her career advisor informed her that she would not be able to go on IR, and would have to find her own apparment, because her common law was already on IR. Is this true? and can I pass on any links with the rules and regs?

thanks

 

[armyvern]

Hey a quick question for a friend. One of my course mates is on IR with me, and his common law who is also in the military was just posted away from the home they are both paying a mortgage on. Her career advisor informed her that she would not be able to go on IR, and would have to find her own apparment, because her common law was already on IR. Is this true? and can I pass on any links with the rules and regs?

thanks

Yes, it's correct. Why would two people need 3 places to live? A member of a couple can collect IR benefits when they are required to maintain their "principal residence", but one is required to proceed away from it unaccompanied; the CF then pays IR benefits to cover the costs (up to the ceiling) for the member posted away from that residence.

If a married service couple were posted to Petawawa together (for example), but wanted to keep their home in Kingston ... they'd have to pay to live in Pet out of their own pockets as well as to pay to maintain that residence in Kingston.

Why would the CF pay when 2 members choose to keep a house in a location that neither one of them is posted to? They are choosing to keep a residence at a third location, they get to pay for it (and they get to pay for her to live wherever she is posted to too -- it's not the CFs problem that she didn't dispose of the other residence). The CF is responsible to pay only for the living costs for ONE member, not two, when couples are posted apart (and the CF will still be paying his IR costs).